Smaller team sizes option does not work

8 games and every single one is 16v16. please just let me play 12v12 battles only, Im happy to wait longer for a game.

16v16 is too much, its just chaos, and aside from it being luck based and not fun it kills my performance, frame drops constantly when looking into the furball all the way down to 45fps. Its lame and I’d rather not play it at all.

I’d honestly rather wait several minutes in a que for 12v12 or less, than play 16vs16 call of duty with planes.

44 Likes

It needs to be the default, and it needs to not force us to play large games.

32 Likes

I also wish it was an option under br 10.0.

My most fun prop games are always those where we only get 6v6 or so. Turns out, when it’s not an utter clusterfuck - basic fighter maneuvers go a long way at increasing survivability!

Those matches I always end with a GG, even if I get beaten as I get to have a ton of fun.

16v16? You engage with an enemy or begin defensive flying to make someone higher bleed energy and then the remaining 10 kill you. Your only option is to extend out and create as much separation as possible before making another pass. An option that leads to you being the only survivor OR the enemy team dying before you re-engage. Even winning games feel boring like this.

16v16 would work if there were a more spread out set of objectives and multiple airfields buuut… Gaijin has only made maps worse than that. I distinctly remember old school air RB before 2015 having objectives farther apart.

13 Likes

WT is now all about lowest common denominator. Enjoy xx

7 Likes

what?

yeah the option should ensure that you get a 12v12 match. Anyone who enables that option has no interest in 16v16

10 Likes

AF turns to 16 v 16 because most don’t climb and just furball.

Ground has flanks hindered/removed, more about face smacking, because most just hold w and want quick face to face combat.

This is where the playerbase has taken the game.

6 Likes

Dumb down the game to appeal to the broad audience in order to maximize profit.
Lennin would be rolling in his grave.

6 Likes

My favourite part about ground flanks is that they’re invisible until you get near them. So you plan a flanking route and suddenly “you got 20 seconds to return to battlefield.”

This is especially bad on north holland south

3 Likes

Honestly could not agree more.
Especially now that the grind is upon us again, facing a wall of potentially 16 FOX-3 carriers while not being able to really do much to them until they’ve had their fill really sucks.

Been noticing a lot as we played the new updates. If you dont have a competitive missile or radar, you need to hug the ground even harder and play passive as hell to have a chance at survival, just because of the sheer amount of angles you could get hit from.

Team sizes really are the core issue and FOX-3s exacerbate the issue tremendously.
I don’t even get what they were going for with the “option” idea. Seems like a cheap way to placate the less vocal playerbase instead of addressing core gameplay issues.

9 Likes

Playing a minor nation or anything but US seems to be incredibly painful at the moment, almost all the games today have been against full or mostly full f16c’s, even the ‘‘better matches’’ are mixed with US on both sides when there is actually a chance for win.

Grinding with a Gripen A is literally snipers vs knifes fight, its a long road ahead before im getting into Gripen C and rb99’s…

skill issue probably

3 Likes

Until we get stock SARH/ARH or put multipathing back to the way it was then I’m gonna keep selecting 16v16.

I don’t need to make stock grind any harder then it already is.

2 Likes

The same problem is with night battles. Gajin however only allows it at 10.0 to make more people buy premiums to get the decorations.

1 Like

Team sizes should vary by BR.

16v16 is only available below 3.0, 12v12 should be the default from 3.0-9.0, 10v10 from 9.3-10.7, and 8v8 from 11.0+.

Same. I don’t play very much above 10.0, and 16v16 makes all gameplay worse. It leads to constant snowballs, and it leaves no room for proper dogfights.

10 Likes

My guess is that it’s because VERY few people know about. Unless you’re very closely following patch changes or browsing the forums, which most players don’t do, you’d have no way of knowing about the option in the first place. And without enough players selecting it, smaller lobbies can’t be formed.

I mentioned it in chat in a couple of games and most people had no idea what I was talking about or where to even find the option.

Watch Gaijin remove it after a few weeks because “few people were selecting it so people clearly don’t want smaller teams :)”. The way it was so stealthily implemented makes me think it’s deliberate. Top tier matches should be 10v10 at most, unconditionally.

3 Likes

It was mentioned in changelog.
It was mentioned in separate article related to the change earlier.
It was even mentioned in official Major Update video (with instruction how to switch it).

You couldn’t just implement a switch for a separate 12v12 game queue, right?
I honestly wouldn’t mind waiting longer for smaller games

9 Likes

Why the push for 16 vs 16 in Air RB, at top tier?

The most prevalent comment regarding top tier Air RB seems to be a general dislike of 16 vs 16, on the current maps. So Im just curious as to why the devs seem to insist on 16 vs 16 being the default option?

9 Likes

And still it seems the average player doesn’t know it exists as an option.

It’s taking me a lot of restraint and willpower to be polite here. Just letting you know.

8 Likes

Or maybe they know this exists and dont want to have that? Wild thought I guess.

1 Like